Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?
From: YBM (ybmess_at_nooos.fr)
Date: 09/13/04
- Next message: Patrick Reany: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- Previous message: Patrick Reany: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- In reply to: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Next in thread: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Reply: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:27:44 +0200
Eugene Shubert a écrit :
> Lorentz contraction is coordinate dependent. It is subjective,
> misleading and not objectively real.
It is not coordinate dependant : for any comoving mobiles, their
distance as measured in their own frame ('proper length') is
*always* longer than measured in *any* other frame.
Take any elementary verification of SR, such as the classical
muon path, what is coordinate dependant there ?
> Away with such nonsense!
You're going exactly where I predicted you'll go. After ROS
to be "nonsense", now it is length contraction (and so
time dilatation as well). It will become more and more
difficult to claim seriously to "derive" SR.
- Next message: Patrick Reany: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- Previous message: Patrick Reany: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- In reply to: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Next in thread: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Reply: Eugene Shubert: "Re: Is Lorentz contraction objectively real?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]